In Grayson Consulting Inc v Lloyd, 2019 ONCA 79, the Court of Appeal considered when a proceeding would be an “appropriate means to remedy a loss” in the context of a claim commenced to enforce a foreign judgment where a Mareva injunction had also been granted.

Grayson obtained default judgment against the respondent in South Carolina on August 20, 2014 (“SC Judgment”). While certain appeals were taken against certain other defendants in the initial action (final appellate decision took effect on March 29, 2016) no appeal was taken from the SC Judgment. In December 2017, Grayson commenced proceedings in Ontario in respect of the SC Default Judgment and also obtained a Mareva injunction against the defendant.

In Independence Plaza 1 Associates, LLC v. Figliolini, 2017 ONCA 44, the Court of Appeal for Ontario issued a decision on the appropriate limitation period for the enforcement of foreign judgments and has provided guidance on when the limitation period starts to run. Up until now, there has been conflicting case law among the Superior Courts as to the interpretation of s. 16(1)(b) of the Limitations Act, 2002, but this case finally puts an end to the current debate.

In summary:

(1) The basic two-year limitation period under s. 4 of the Limitations Act, 2002 applies to a proceeding on a foreign judgment; and

(2) The limitation period begins to run, at the earliest, when the time to appeal the foreign judgment has expired or, if an appeal is taken, the date of the appeal decision.

The applicants brought an application in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice to enforce a Quebec default judgment against the respondent in Ontario. The applicant obtained a default judgment against the respondent in November 2005 in Quebec. In July 2010, the applicant applied to enforce the judgment in Ontario. The respondent took the position that the application was statute barred.

The applicants brought an application in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice to enforce a Quebec default judgment against the respondent in Ontario. The applicant obtained a default judgment against the respondent in November 2005 in Quebec. In July 2010, the applicant applied to enforce the judgment in Ontario. The respondent took the position that the application was statute barred.

About Dentons

Dentons is the world's first polycentric global law firm. A top 20 firm on the Acritas 2015 Global Elite Brand Index, the Firm is committed to challenging the status quo in delivering consistent and uncompromising quality and value in new and inventive ways. Driven to provide clients a competitive edge, and connected to the communities where its clients want to do business, Dentons knows that understanding local cultures is crucial to successfully completing a deal, resolving a dispute or solving a business challenge. Now the world's largest law firm, Dentons' global team builds agile, tailored solutions to meet the local, national and global needs of private and public clients of any size in more than 125 locations serving 50-plus countries. www.dentons.com.